"Personalized learning is often presented as an outcome of smarter content or better recommendations. In practice, it's far more dependent on the underlying structure of the learning platform itself. When personalization is treated as an enhancement rather than a design principle, it rarely scales and often creates more problems than it solves. I've seen this pattern repeatedly. Organizations attempt to personalize learning by layering logic, rules, or AI tools onto systems that were never designed to adapt."
"Partner and customer education rarely follows neat, linear paths. Learners appear at unpredictable moments. Job roles evolve mid-program. Training responsibilities cascade across organizations-from vendors to partners to end-users-often across regions, languages, and regulatory contexts. In these ecosystems, assumptions collapse quickly: You don't control when learners engage. You don't know what they already understand. You can't rely on a single source of learner data. Static course catalogs struggle here. Adding superficial personalization, such as basic role filters or optional modules, doesn't solve the problem."
Personalized learning depends primarily on the design of the learning platform rather than solely on smarter content or recommendation engines. Treating personalization as an add-on leads to brittle pathways, fragmented data, and scaling failures. Organizations commonly layer logic, rules, or AI onto platforms that were not built to adapt, producing gaps between learner needs and LMS capabilities. External training with partners and customers exposes those weaknesses because engagement timing, prior knowledge, evolving roles, and distributed responsibilities create unpredictable pathways. Superficial personalization like role filters or optional modules fails to provide needed flexibility. AI amplifies existing platform limitations rather than fixing foundational design flaws.
Read at eLearning Industry
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]